So, when and if we attack Iran, is there going to be a big public "roll-out"

[northernsoul]

or will it be sudden and out of the blue? I ask because of B*sh's apparent articulation (if that word can be used) of causus belli in Reno today. Is it part of a slow bleed into conflict with Iran, or is it just a spit-out pro forma declaration before the bombs start to fall?

Secondly, are the resignations of Rove and Gonzo related to an imminent attack on Iran? Do they see plenty of the proverbial shit hitting the fan and want to comfortably retired to Texas when it does?

Thirdly, are the billions of dollars that are being invested in "put" options which are essentially bets that the stock market will tank in a big way in any way related to an upcoming attack on Iran? Does some insider think that they are going to profit from what they know will be an economic catastrophe?

There, I think I've got enough tin foil around the old noggin for one post.

[Adsos Letter]

1. it aint tinfoil...

and, no, I would think there would be No public roll-out...for the very real reason that, if Bush should decide to go the absolutely "lost all yer freakin' marbles-insane" route, we would want whatever advantage could be gained by "surprise", and the explanation would follow. Just my opinin'

[northernsoul]

2. I'm afraid you're right

My guess that we'll find out when they interrupt Deal or No Deal with a message from the Oval Office: "My fellow Americans..." and then the turd really hits the turbines.

[Adsos Letter]

4. Serious question for you...

(somewhat OT) but...

Why do you think the American public is so...docile...in the face of all that has happened over the last few years?

We talk a lot about these things on DU, but what forces do you think are in operation here? Does it simply boil down to a combination of apathy and lack of leadership (outside the White House, I mean...)

[northernsoul]

7. some quick thoughts

learned helplessness
Stockholm Syndrome
lots and lots of distractions
most middle-class people fell like they're on the edge of economic catastrophe
disbelief at the surreality of all the shit that's happened since 2000

[Adsos Letter]

8. I think you have boiled it down very well...

thanks for taking the time.

[warren pease]

11. A big contributor...

In poll after poll, about 92 percent of Americans say TV news is their sole or primary source of information. If you were among that 92 percent, and had never spent any time reading or participating in discussions on bulletin boards or blogs that offer a different world view, how much do you think you'd know about BushCo's motives and methods?

For myself, if I thought CNN was a news dispenser rather than an infotainment center and actually believed Wolf Blitzer and Paula Zahn were journalists, I'm certain I'd be clueless about nearly every single issue that currently sits on page one here in GD.

To make things even worse, add a dose of wingnut radio, stir in a bit of fundie insanity, consider the death of critical thinking at the hands of advertising and PR, imagine that the WSJ editorial page and Forbes are taken seriously by millions, and you have a perfect recipe for ignorance, apathy, complacency, mindless patriotism, smugness, reflexive obedience to the state and blind trust in institutions and leaders.

But above all else, it's TV news that's the real culprit. The entire rest of mass media could be moderate to left and it wouldn't penetrate the thick skulls of the 92 percent who have been poisoned by television.


wp

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. BINGO

and by the way you just described MY parents, who still believe CNN is a news network

I just chuckle when they say that

[rurallib]

3. No there wasn't.

[wuushew]

5. The political situation is not going Bush's way

Iran, IAEA see progress on nuclear talks

TEHRAN, Iran (Reuters) -- Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency both said on Tuesday they had made progress in talks about Tehran's offer of more transparency aimed at defusing a row over the Iranian nuclear program.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/08/21/iran.nuclear.reut/index.html

[lonestarnot]

6. You will just wake up one morning and there it will be in the headlines of your local paper like so

much ketsup on a white shirt.

[Bucky]

9. There won't be an attack on Iran

We've sweated through nearly three years of rumors of "imminent" and "concrete plans for" attacks on Iran. It's time to start believing your eyes again. Bush is gonna bomb Iran in the same way that ugly geek in your high school gym class was getting laid every summer by his "girlfriend who lives up in Canada."

All squawk, no walk, nothing but a chickenhawk.

Not even Junior lives in a world free from consequences.

[northernsoul]

10. I hope you're right!

I love the comparison of Bush to the geek with a mythical girlfriend in Canada. Up until yesterday, I pretty much felt like you do. However, the degree of belicosity and provocation lately does seem to be cause for concern. Glenn Greenwald, whom I consider to be a fairly sober observer and commentator also sees cause to worry. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?last_story=/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/29/iran/

I guess the question really is, just how fucking crazy are these people?

[warren pease]

12. "just how fucking crazy are these people?"

Crazy enough to declare an elite force within the Iranian army a "terrorist organization" just to get all us mindless idiots to go along with nuking the country under the guise of the never-ending "war on terra."

Their track record suggests they're more than crazy enough to use "tactical" nukes on Iran, or have some proxy like Israel do it for them. I doubt Israel would do it on their own because such an action would precipitate certain retaliation by all their neighbors. But I'm sure the US has a few levers and fulcrums they can use to "coax" the Israelis into it. Maybe threaten to cut off their annual $3 billion military and economic assistance fees if they refuse. Maybe promise to double it if they cooperate.

But absent a compliant proxy, these lunatics will happily go it alone. They have made scorn for world opinion a key element of their foreign policy, such as it is. They live for blood and oil and, as with Iraq, they have another opportunity to satisfy their lust for both. And as fundie maniacs, the very worst thing that can happen is they're start a nuclear war which will fulfill the prophesies about the Rapture -- which is the only thing every good fundie has to look forward to in their miserable, mindless, soul-shriveled lives.

We are governed, if that's the word, by a bunch of Dr. Strangeloves who seem to spend much of their time inventing clever new ways to inflict the US version of free trade on the oil-rich countries of the world. The Saudis are exempt for the time being, kindred spirits and all that, but that's a pretty giant puddle of our oil sitting under their sand, and the temptation may prove impossible to resist.

For now, though, if they can manage to control Iraq's oil production facilities, remove Iran as a military force in the region and grab those oil reserves as well, they'll be content to let the Saudis be removed by an internal revolution rather than by the usual CIA-sponsored "freedom fighters."

Sound like a fair take on their combined mental state?


wp

[northernsoul]

15. Eloquently stated,

this deserves to be a post of its own.

[Javaman]

13. We will all wake up one morning and find out that Iran is glowing. nt

[LSK]

14. my 2 cents

1. I think it would be selected air strikes out of the blue.

2. Rove and Gonzo might have more to do with Iraq and the report coming out and upcoming funding battles.

3. Put options have more to do with the market tanking because of the mortgage crisis.